Henry More and Nicolas Malebranche’s Critiques of Spinoza, Jasper Reid

Henry More and Nicolas Malebranche’s Critiques of Spinoza (pages 764–792) Jasper Reid, Article first published online: 6 MAR 2013 | DOI: 10.1111/ejop.12008,  (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejop.12008/abstract)

Henry More and Nicolas Malebranche, each in his own way, drew a distinction between two kinds of extension, the one indivisible and the other divisible. Spinoza also drew a comparable distinction, explaining that, insofar as extended substance was conceived intellectually, it would be grasped as indivisible, whereas, when it was instead depicted in the imagination, it would be seen as divisible. But, whereas for Spinoza these were just different views on one and the same extended substance, More and Malebranche’s two kinds of extension were supposed to be really distinct from one another. Consequently, neither of them could identify Spinoza’s substance with both of his own non-identical kinds; and so they faced a choice over which one they would associate it with. The intriguing thing is that here they diverged. More felt that Spinoza’s substance was actually divisible, and consequently material. Malebranche felt that it was actually indivisible, and consequently ideal and divine. In each case, they felt that the other kind of extension—whichever that might be—was simply absent from Spinoza’s system. This article explores this divergence between More and Malebranche’s interpretations of Spinoza’s metaphysics, and it seeks an explanation for it in their own respective epistemologies.

European Journal of Philosophy, Volume 23, Issue 3, September 2015

NYU Conference on Issues in Modern Philosophy



2015 Conference on Issues in Modern Philosophy


The Twelfth NYU Conference on Issues in Modern Philosophy

New York University, November 6-7, 2015
Kimmel Center, 60 Washington Square South, Room 914

Registration is free but required by Tuesday, November 3, and is available here.

The New York University Department of Philosophy will host the twelfth in its series of conferences on issues in the history of modern philosophy on November 6 and 7, 2015. Each conference in the series examines the development of a central philosophical problem from early modern philosophy to the present, exploring the evolution of formulations of the problem and of approaches to resolving it. By examining the work of philosophers of the past both in historical context and in relation to contemporary philosophical thinking, the conferences allow philosophy’s past and present to illuminate one another.

Second session: Conway

Speaker Christia Mercer (Columbia University)
Commentator Jasper Reid (King’s College, London)


Hampton on “Herder’s Cudworth Inspired Revision of Spinoza from ‘Plastik’ to ‘Kraft’”


, , , , , , ,

Alexander J. B. Hampton, “An English Source of German Romanticism: Herder’s Cudworth Inspired Revision of Spinoza from ‘Plastik’ to ‘Kraft’” The Heythrop Journal

Article first published online : 14 JUL 2015 07:26AM EST, DOI: 10.1111/heyj.12272

This examination considers the influence of the seventeenth century Cambridge Platonist Cudworth upon the thought of the late eighteenth century German thinker Herder. It focuses upon Herder’s use of Cudworth’s philosophy to create a revised version of Spinoza’s metaphysics. Both Cudworth and Herder were concerned with the problem of determinism. Cudworth outlined a number of difficulties relating to this problem in the thought of Spinoza and proposed amendments, particularly the introduction of the middle principle of plastik, which would mediate between the Ideas of transcendent reason and mechanical materialism. We find these amendments to Spinoza’s philosophy also employed in Herder’s contribution to the Pantheism Controversy, in which he too offers a revised Spinozism and introduces his own middle principle of Kraft. This demonstrates an important but under-explored English contribution to a key development in German intellectual history. The Pantheism Controversy was an epoch-making event, helping to bring an end to the German Enlightenment and to inaugurate the Romantic movement. Herder’s version of Spinoza’s thought revived the philosopher’s fortunes, and Herder’s notion of Kraft became central to Romantic aesthetics. Finally, Herder’s use of Cudworth demonstrates the important but overlooked source of Platonic realism in German Romantic thought.



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.